Reproducibility Of Bone Mineral Density Research Articles

Reproducibility of DXA-based bone strain index and the influence of body mass: an in vivo study.

Bone strain index (BSI) is a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-derived index of bone strength obtained from lumbar densitometric scan. We estimated the reproducibility of BSI in healthy women with different body mass index. We enrolled postmenopausal women (mean age ± SD: 66 ± 10years) divided into three groups (A, B and C) according to body mass index (BMI: < 25; 25-29.9; ≥ 30kg/m2) and two groups (D and E) according to waist circumference (WC: ≤ 88; > 88cm), each of 30 subjects. They underwent two DXA examinations with in-between repositioning, according to the International Society for Clinical Densitometry guidelines for precision estimation. Bone mineral density (BMD) and BSI were expressed as g/cm2 and absolute value, respectively. The coefficient of variation (CoV) was calculated as the ratio between root-mean-square standard deviation and mean; least significant change percentage (LSC%) as 2.77 × CoV; reproducibility as the complement to 100% LSC. BSI increased proportionally to BMI and WC and significantly in group C compared to B and A (p = 0.032 and 0.006, respectively). BSI was significantly higher in E compared to D (p = 0.017), whereas no differences were observed in BMD. Although BSI reproducibility was slightly lower in group C (89%), the differences were not significant between all groups. BMD reproducibility did not significantly differ between all groups. BSI reproducibility was significantly lower than that of BMD and decreased proportionally to BMI and WC increase. This reduction of BSI reproducibility was more pronounced in patients with BMI ≥ 30 and WC > 88, as expected, being BSI a parameter sensible to weight.

Fat Mass Does Not Increase the Precision Error of Trabecular Bone Score Measurements

Introduction: Trabecular bone score (TBS) is an indirect index of trabecular microarchitecture derived from lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Previous phantom study showed that an increase in soft tissue thickness does not affect TBS reproducibility. We investigated the effect of increasing body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference on TBS precision error on patients, compared to bone mineral density (BMD). Methodology: A population of postmenopausal Caucasian women was distributed in 3 different BMI (normal, overweight, and class I obesity), plus 2 further groups based on waist circumference diameter (≤88 cm and >88 cm, respectively). In vivo precision error was calculated on 30 consecutive subjects that were scanned 2 times, with patient repositioning, using the Hologic QDR-Discovery W densitometer. Coefficient of variation, percent least significant change, and reproducibility were calculated according to the International Society for Clinical Densitometry guidelines. Results: Ninety-five women aged 66 ± 10 (mean ± standard deviation) were included. No significant differences were found both for BMD and TBS precision errors, respectively, when comparing BMI groups and waist circumference groups. BMD reproducibility ranged from 95.9% (BMI > 30 kg/m2) to 97.5% (BMI < 25 kg/m2). TBS reproducibility ranged between 95.8% (BMI = 25–29.9 kg/m2, waist circumference > 88 cm) and 96.6% (BMI < 25 kg/m2). With the exception of obese group, a significant difference was found between BMD and TBS reproducibility, being that of TBS slightly lower than BMD. A significant decrease of TBS values was found between normal and obese subjects, as well as between waist circumference groups. Conclusions: TBS precision error is not affected by BMI and waist circumference differences. TBS reproducibility showed to be slightly lower than that of BMD, but this difference was mitigated in obese patients. A negative association was found between the amount of fat mass and TBS mean values.

DXA Measured Distal Femur Bone Mineral Density in Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Method Development and Reproducibility

Introduction: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasingly being performed. Distal femur periprosthetic fracture is a potentially catastrophic complication following TKA and existing data document substantial distal femur bone mineral density (BMD) loss following TKA. However, distal femur BMD is virtually never measured clinically as no consensus approach exists. This pilot study's purpose was to define regional BMD variation throughout the femur, suggest standard dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) regions of interest (ROIs) and evaluate BMD reproducibility at these ROIs. Methods: Thirty volunteers 2–5 yr post TKA had both entire femurs imaged twice using a Lunar iDXA with subject repositioning between scans; the atypical femur fracture feature of enCORE software was utilized. To define femoral BMD distribution, custom 1 cm ROIs were stacked one atop the other starting at the intercondylar notch and continuing to the base of the lesser trochanter. Femur length was measured with the ruler tool to calculate distance at 5% increments. ROIs encompassing each 5% increment were utilized to measure BMD at each location. Descriptive statistics were used to determine mean BMD at each ROI and reproducibility at the 15%, 25%, 45%, 60%, and 80% ROIs. Results: The 5 and 10% ROIs included prosthetic and/or patella, causing high BMD values. Distal femur BMD was lowest at the 15% ROI and was higher (p < 0.05) at each more proximal ROI to 45%, then plateaued from 45% to 75%. BMD reproducibility at these regions was excellent; coefficient of variation (CV) from ∼1% to 3.5%. As periprosthetic fractures generally occur in the distal femur, we propose measuring femur BMD using ROIs placed at 15% and 25%. A 60% region could also be used as a highly cortical site. Conclusion: Existing DXA capabilities allow distal femur BMD measurement with good reproducibility. Further research using standardized ROIs to assess distal femur BMD loss after TKA, and interventions to mitigate this loss, is indicated.

Reproducibility of trabecular bone score with different scan modes using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: a phantom study.

The trabecular bone score (TBS) accounts for the bone microarchitecture and is calculated on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). We estimated the reproducibility of the TBS using different scan modes compared to the reproducibility bone mineral density (BMD). A spine phantom was used with a Hologic QDR-Discovery A densitometer. For each scan mode [fast array, array, high definition (HD)], 25 scans were automatically performed without phantom repositioning; a further 25 scans were performed with phantom repositioning. For each scan, the TBS was obtained. The coefficient of variation (CoV) was calculated as the ratio between standard deviation and mean; percent least significant change (LSC%) as 2.8 × CoV; reproducibility as the complement to 100 % of LSC%. Differences among scan modes were assessed using ANOVA. Without phantom repositioning, the mean TBS (mm(-1)) was: 1.352 (fast array), 1.321 (array), and 1.360 (HD); with phantom repositioning, it was 1.345, 1.332, and 1.362, respectively. Reproducibility of the TBS without phantom repositioning was 97.7 % (fast array), 98.3 % (array), and 98.2 % (HD); with phantom repositioning, it was 97.9 %, 98.7 %, and 98.4 %, respectively. LSC% was ≤ 2.26 %. Differences among scan modes were all statistically significant (p ≤ 0.019). Reproducibility of BMD was 99.1 % with all scan modes, while LSC% was from 0.86 % to 0.91 %. Reproducibility error of the TBS was 2-3-fold higher than that of BMD. Although statistically significant, differences in TBS among scan modes were within the highest LSC%. Thus, the three scan modes can be considered interchangeable.

In vivo differences among scan modes in bone mineral density measurement at dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

Our aim was to estimate the in vivo reproducibility of bone mineral density (BMD) at dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and to compare fast array, array, and high-definition scan modes. A total of 378 patients (38 males and 340 females; mean age 63 ± 9 years) underwent DXA using a QDR-Discovery A densitometer (Hologic). Considering the three scan modes on lumbar spine and right femur, six independent groups of 30 patients were examined twice (for a total of 180 patients). Least significant change (LSC) and smallest detectable difference (SDD) were calculated. The remaining 198 patients underwent three scans of the lumbar spine (n = 92) or of the right femur (n = 106), one for each scan mode. The student t test and Bland-Altman analysis used were. Scan times were recorded and radiation dose was estimated using the ICRP60 method. Intra-scan mode reproducibility was 98-99%, corresponding to an LSC of 1.49-2.08%. The SDD was 0.018-0.023 g/cm(2) (lumbar spine) and 0.017-0.019 g/cm(2) (right femur). All comparisons among scan modes were statistically significant (p < 0.001) but lower than SDDs, i.e. not clinically relevant. Considering lumbar spine and the right femur, scan times were 50 and 38 s for fast array, 98 and 74 s for array, and 195 and 148 s for high definition, respectively; radiation doses were 6.7 and 4.7 μSv for fast array, and 13.3 and 9.3 μSv for both array and high definition, respectively. Since all BMD differences were lower than the SSDs, the three scan modes can be considered interchangeable. As a consequence, although the absolute reduction in time and radiation dose is relatively low, when BMD measurement is the aim of DXA, fast array can be generally preferred.

Changes in Bone Mineral Density in Women Following 1-year Gastric Bypass Surgery, Published by Casagrande DS et al.—Reply

We would like to address some of the questions that Dr. Pluskiewicz et al. [1] raises in his recent letter. Bone mineral density (BMD) measurements are affected by precision and accuracy errors. Precision errors, usually evaluated in terms of the coefficient of variation (CV), measure the reproducibility of BMD results in individual patients and can be demonstrated by performing repeated scans on a representative sample. The BMD changes observed on follow-up scans can be interpreted as the least significant change (LSC), equal to approximately three times the CV. Changes greater than the LSC would be regarded as clinically significant [2, 3]. In the Sao Lucas Hospital of Pontificia UniversidadeCatolica do Rio Grande do Sul (HSL PUCRS) where the dual-energy Xray absorptiometry exams were made, the CV is 2 % in the lumbar spine and 3 % in the proximal femur (femoral neck and total femur), and the LSC is 5.6 % for the lumbar spine and 8.5 % for the proximal femur. Applying this method of evaluation to our data means that BMD results for women reported in our study [4] decreased 7.3, 8.8, and 8.6 % in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total femur, respectively, after gastric bypass surgery. We have not reported our results using the LSC, as this index was questioned due to changes associated with the patient’s BMI [3]. Such considerations imply that clinically significant differences between successive BMD results obtained from smaller patients may be unidentified and changes in larger patients may be inappropriately identified as valid [3]. As BMD results depend on multiple factors other than those determined by bariatric surgery, it is clear that not in all subjects after the procedure we should expect significant bone changes. Moreover, Pluskiewicz et al. [1] reported follow up data for only 6 months, which may explain their inability to uncover these changes as we did through a 1year follow-up period.

Reproducibility of DXA measurements of bone mineral density and body composition in children

The technique of X-ray-based dual photon absorptiometry (DXA) is frequently used in children for the detection of changes in bone mass or body composition. Such changes can only be considered real if the uncertainties arising from the measurement technique are exceeded. Our objectives were twofold: (1) to determine the reproducibility of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements in children at the spine and the hip and from the whole body, as well as of whole-body measurements of mineral mass, lean body mass and fat mass in children; and (2) to estimate, from the measured precision, the time interval that needs to elapse before a statistically significant change in a DXA variable can be detected. The reproducibility of techniques for the measurement of BMD and body composition using DXA was measured in 15 young children (9 girls and 6 boys) and 17 older children (9 girls and 8 boys). Reproducibility was derived from the standard deviation of three repeated measurements of spine BMD, total hip BMD, whole-body BMD (WBBMD), whole-body bone mineral content (WBBMC), lean mass and fat mass. Technique precision was better than 0.01 g cm(-2) for spine BMD and for WBBMD. Hip BMD measurements were slightly less precise, particularly in younger children (0.013 g cm(-2)). For body composition variables, technique precision was 13 g for WBBMC, 201 g for lean body mass and 172 g for fat mass in younger children. Technique precision for older children was 18 g, 251 g and 189 g for the corresponding variables. Predictions showed that the absence of a normal increase in WBBMC in a small-for-age girl could be established after 12 months. For spine BMD, a significant increase should be observable after 6 months for boys over the age of 11 years. For younger boys, more than 12 months has to elapse before anticipated changes can be detected with confidence. The time intervals required to elapse before decisions can be made concerning the significance of observed differences between successive measurements of BMD or body composition in children depend upon the age of the child.

Factors Affecting Short-Term Bone Density Precision Assessment and the Effect on Patient Monitoring

The most widely used procedure for performing a BMD reproducibility assessment (same-technologist with simple repositioning on the same day) systematically underestimates precision error and will lead to over categorization of change in a large fraction of monitored patients. The most common procedure for establishing the least significant change (LSC) to monitor bone mineral density (BMD) with DXA is for the same technologist to perform repeat subject scans on the same day with simple repositioning. The objective of the current report is to determine how the reproducibility scanning procedure impacts on the precision assessment and categorization of change in routine clinical practice. The study population was drawn from the database of the Manitoba Bone Density Program which includes all clinical DXA test results for the Province of Manitoba, Canada. All patients who had baseline and follow up total spine (L1-4) and the total hip BMD measurements on the same instrument up to March 31, 2007 were included as the 'clinical monitoring population' (N = 5048 scan-pairs). BMD precision was assessed in a convenience sample of patients who were agreeable to undergoing a repeat assessment (50% performed on the same day with repositioning, 68% by different technologists) (N = 331 spine and 328 hip scan-pairs). Precision error was greater when the scan-pairs were acquired on different days than on the same day for both the total spine (p < .001) and total hip (p < .01). No other factor was consistently associated with precision error. The reference LSC (different days and different technologists) categorized the smallest fraction of the monitored population with change, whereas other combinations gave a significant rate of over categorization (up to 19.3% for the lumbar spine and up to 18.3% for the total hip). The most widely procedure for performing a BMD reproducibility assessment (same-technologist with simple repositioning on the same day) systematically underestimates precision error and will lead to over categorization of change in a large fraction of monitored patients.

DXA Scanning of Acetabulum in Patients With Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty

The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements of the periprosthetic bone in patients with hemispherical acetabular cups in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA). Thirty patients were treated for primary osteoarthrosis with cementless THA. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning was performed with a pencil-beam bone densitometer (Norland XR-36). Accuracy and reproducibility was determined by double measurements of BMD in four regions of interest (ROI). The influence of patient postures including various pelvic inclination angles was evaluated as well. Pitman test for a combined netROI revealed a standard deviation ratio of 3.2 for the anterio-posterior scans related to the lateral position. The Wilkinson ROIs showed a high intraobserver agreement. With pelvic tilt increasing until 20 degrees , the precision of DXA scanning decreased. In conclusion, reproducibility of DXA scanning was high. This study demonstrated that the patients can be scanned in the supine position, and BMD measurement of the periacetabular bone can be performed using the Wilkinson model with four rectangular ROIs.

Reproducibility of bone mineral density measurements using dual X-ray absorptiometry in daily clinical practice

Bone mineral density (BMD) measurements are frequently performed repeatedly for each patient. Subsequent BMD measurements allow reproducibility to be assessed. Previous studies have suggested that reproducibility may be influenced by age and clinical status. The purpose of the study was to examine the reproducibility of BMD by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and to investigate the practical value of different measures of reproducibility in three distinct groups of subjects: healthy young volunteers, postmenopausal women and patients with chronic rheumatic diseases. Two hundred twenty-two subjects underwent two subsequent BMD measurements of the spine and hip. There were 60 young healthy subjects, 102 postmenopausal women and 60 patients with chronic rheumatic diseases (33 rheumatoid arthritis, 10 ankylosing spondylitis and 10 other systemic diseases). Forty-five patients (75%) among the third group were receiving corticosteroids. Reproducibility was expressed as the smallest detectable difference (SDD), coefficient of variation (CV), least significant change (LSC) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Sources of variation were investigated by linear regression analysis. The median interval between measurements was 0 days (range 0-7). The mean difference (SD) between the measurements (g/cm2) was -0.0001 (+/-0.003) and -0.0004 (+/-0.002) at L1-L4 and the total hip, respectively. At L1-L4 and the total hip, SDD (g/cm2) was +/-0.04 and +/-0.02, CV (%) was 2.02 and 1.29, and LSC (%) 5.60 and 3.56, respectively. The ICC at the spine and hip was 0.99 and 0.99, respectively. Only a minimal difference existed between the groups. Reproducibility in the three groups studied was good. In a repeated DXA scan, a BMD change, the least significant change (LSC) or the SDD should be regarded as significant. Use of the SDD is preferable to use of the CV and LSC because of its independence from BMD and its expression in absolute units. Expressed as SDD, a BMD change of at least +/-0.04 g/cm2 at L1-L4 and +/-0.02 g/cm2 at the total hip should be considered significant. This reproducibility seems independent from age and clinical status and improved in the hips by measuring the dual femur.

Recommendations for monitoring antiresorptive therapies in postmenopausal osteoporosis

Antiresorptive agents are effective in preventing and treating postmenopausal osteoporosis, provided they are taken as directed. Regular physical examinations including height measurements may fail to ensure optimal compliance. Bone mineral density (BMD) measurement is indispensable for determining whether treatment is warranted. The measurement can be repeated after 2 years at least, provided quality-control procedures are adequate. BMD changes over time should be compared to the least significant change calculated from the in vivo BMD reproducibility at the measurement center. However, BMD changes are not correlated with the fracture risk reduction induced by antiresorptive treatment. Biochemical markers for bone turnover can be monitored after only 3–6 months provided steps are taken to control for intraindividual variability. They are useful when patient compliance is poor or the treatment response inadequate.

Recommandations pour le suivi des traitements antirésorptifs au cours de l’ostéoporose postménopausique

Antiresorptive agents are effective in preventing and treating postmenopausal osteoporosis, provided they are taken as directed. Regular physical examinations including height measurements may fail to ensure optimal compliance. Bone mineral density (BMD) measurement is indispensable for determining whether treatment is warranted. The measurement can be repeated after two years at least, provided quality-control procedures are adequate. BMD changes over time should be compared to the least significant change calculated from the in vivo BMD reproducibility at the measurement center. However, BMD changes are not correlated with the fracture risk reduction induced by antiresorptive treatment. Biochemical markers for bone turnover can be monitored after only three to six months provided steps are taken to control for intraindividual variability. They are useful when patient compliance is poor or the treatment response inadequate.

Reproducibility of DXA: Potential Impact on Serial Measurements and Misclassification of Osteoporosis

The reproducibility of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), based on 12 successive monthly determinations, was assessed in a group of 24 subjects (23 postmenopausal women, 1 man) using six trained operators. The variability (S2A) was calculated from both duplicate operator measurements and the standard error of estimate from nonparametric regression of the individual subject series. Robust estimates of SA from the 90th percentile of the sampling distribution of variances were calculated for the spine (25 mg/cm2), femur neck (20 mg/cm2) and total femur (15.5 mg/cm2) using the bootstrap technique. The critical difference for a significant decrease (p = 0.05) at the spine, femoral neck and total femur was estimated at 57, 46 and 36 mg/cm2 respectively. Estimation of S2A allowed calculation of the probability that the true BMD, for an observed BMD near the osteoporosis diagnostic threshold (T-score < -2.5), is not misclassified. Analysis of covariance established a significant operator-subject interaction at all sites, but only the total femur was associated with a significant difference between operators. The percentage of body fat was a significant covariate for the spine and total femur regions. ANOVA showed that the greater proportion of variance was instrument-related. The limitations of DXA as an analytical method are discussed.

Long-term performance in vitro and in vivo of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is actually considered as one of the most appropriate techniques for measuring bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD). An anthropomorphic phantom and a 25-year-old girl were repeatedly measured, 160 times and 50 times respectively, over an 18-month period to investigate performance in vitro and in vivo of a commercial DXA equipment (HOLOGIC QDR 1000). DXA is a highly accurate technique, the BMC and BMD determinations only overestimated the exact value of the phantom by 0.20% and 0.51% respectively. In vivo long-term (18 months) reproducibility of BMD of the spine is characterized by an interassay coefficient of variation (CVt) of 0.8% while, for the different regions of interest of the hip, BMD CVt varies from 1.1% (total zone) to 5.3% (Ward's triangle). In the subject tested, BMD sensitivity for changes of 2.2% at the lumbar spine and 3% at the hip were recorded.

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of the forearm: Reproducibility and correlation with single-photon absorptiometry

Although single-photon absorptiometry (SPA) has been the predominant tool used to assess bone mineral density (BMD) in the forearm, the development of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) provides the benefits of greater source stability, reduced scanning time, and improved image resolution compared to SPA. In the present study we used the DEXA bone densitometer (Hologic, Inc., Waltham, MA) to (1) measure BMD in the one-third radius and ultradistal radius; (2) examine the reproducibility of these BMD measurements; and (3) compare the BMD at the one-third radius with SPA (SP2, Lunar Corp., Madison, WI). In 65 normal women (ages 22-74 years) we examined changes in the forearm DEXA BMD with age, revealing significant quadratic regression equations. The reproducibility of DEXA BMD (mean +/- SEM) in 7 normal subjects aged 22-50 years is 0.85 +/- 0.16% for the predominantly cortical one-third radius site and 0.97 +/- 0.15% for the more trabecular ultradistal site. The regression relationship between DEXA and SPA of the one-third radius in 26 subjects (ages 22-68 years) is DEXA BMD = 0.105 + 0.826 (SPA BMD); R = 0.97, R2 = 0.94, p less than 0.0001. Bone densitometry of the forearm using DEXA may be performed relatively rapidly, providing reproducibility and image resolution that are generally superior to those observed with SPA.

Sensitivity of dual-photon absorptiometry in spinal osteoporosis.

Lumbar spine bone mass and density were measured with Dual photon absorptiometry (DPA) in 60 patients with crush fractures and 60 age-matched normal women. Short-term reproducibility of bone mineral density (BMD) was 1.3% in normal women and 2.5% in osteoporotic women; long-term reproducibility in normal women was 2.2%. The reproducibility of bone mineral content (BMC) seemed to be poorer than that of BMD. In this study, aortic calcifications had no effect on BMD, and one or two crush fractures in the L2-L4 region increased BMD by an average of 3% (0-10%). Lumbar spine DPA provided high sensitivity for these younger crush fracture osteoporotic patients (x = 65 years). The sensitivity at 95% specificity was 74% for BMD and 73% for BMC. This sensitivity is substantially better than that reported for DPA instruments giving higher variances or for quantitative computed tomography.